Le Seigneur des anneaux : Les deux tours

Plus rapide, plus dynamique et plus spectaculaire que La Communauté de l'Anneau. Trois heures ont passé comme si c'était rien. Sans parler du fait que les merveilles, telles que le combat contre le Balrog dans le premier film, sont ici trop nombreuses, jusqu'à l'explosion. Mais j'ai quand même préféré La Communauté de l'Anneau. Il était plus étiré et plus lent, mais plus riche en contenu et plus cohérent. Les Deux Tours sont abrégées et servent toute cette action époustouflante et cette grandeur de manière sous forme d'un livre d'images magnifiques, mais moins liées sur le plan de l'histoire. Même si ce défaut du film est pardonnable, car il sert "seulement" d'intermédiaire entre deux monuments, il me reste toujours une autre critique - l'humour, qui enlève de la dignité et du drame au film (Gollum en train de cuisiner du poisson, Gimli sur les remparts). Du point de vue visuel, cependant, c'est vraiment une merveille avec le personnage numérique le plus élaboré et "le mieux joué" de tous les temps (Gollum), qui est entré sur l'écran de cinéma sans aucune compétition. (20/12/2002)

The Two Towers is such an emotional and visual barrage that the brain is not able to absorb everything it sees at first, and when it was over I couldn't remember what I saw at the beginning. This is not a film to watch once, you absorb it only after a second or third viewing. Die-hard fans of the book will probably squeal in disgust at how Jackson dared to change the plot and character of Faramir. I don’t care, on the contrary, I think those changes benefited the film. I even loved the much-criticised scene with Arwen, in fact, I think it’s one of the best in the film. A film is a film and a book is a book, they are two different worlds. I'm interested in the film and it's well made, it's spectacular and awesome. (16/01/2003)

After watching the theatrical version a few times, I was convinced that, after the excellent Fellowship, The Lord of the Rings movie saga was doing a head dive before it got a chance to take off properly. It was indisputably a strong experience, but too obviously to be taken at face value without anything hidden “underneath the surface". “Merely" perfect craftsmanship and “just" a good movie which, in this case, is too darn little. It’s void of emotion and some of the changes leave you speechless; not even Michael Bay comes anywhere near this. Add to that unbalanced pace and overall incoherence. But then I saw the Special Edition. It’s incredible how this version, which lasts 45 minutes longer, has far better and more balanced pace and, thanks to added and extended scenes, it gains a completely new dimension. These are two different movies in terms of both tone and quality. (20/11/2003)

The most contentious part of the trilogy... The fact that the film is really very good in all aspects only stands out fully in the extended version, in which the otherwise rather broken story of Merry, Pippin and Treebeard is finally concluded; the story of Faramir (eventually one of the best changes) unfolds and the whole film gets some energy. Not energy in the sense of "dynamic forward run", but energy in the sense of "yes, it moves slowly, but I would like it to move even slower, because it is extremely beautiful". I am incredibly irritated by Aragorn's incomprehensible fall into the abyss. Why? But a speck this small can't devalue the impression of a great spectacle. King Theoden's monologue before the Battle of Helm's Deep is another of the moments that will remain in my memory forever, as is the return of the Rohirim to the king... (25/01/2004)

A Elbereth Gilthoniel, oh star-kindler, to the glory of the starry host, I shall now sing! O come to me, Fanuilos! What can I say, the Two Towers extended version is very problematic and I myself have difficulty with it at times. Watching the extended version was therefore a feeling of perfect satisfaction, because I believed Jackson all that time, that he would convince me of the presence of another golden masterpiece. The difference in Faramir's character from the original suddenly stops being a violent complication of Frodo's journey, but becomes a perfectly written character full of humanity. Jackson and his screenwriting team prove that they have the source material read inside out and, above all, they convince the viewer of the key aspect - they understood its spirit. It's not about the fact that the elves decide differently than in the book, but about the fact that in that moment, the power of alliance shines through the screen. And just as strong is the romantic storyline concerning Aragorn's actions, and it is expanded in the necessary way. What good would it do for ignorant viewers to know that at the end of the book trilogy, in the appendices, his whole story is fully told, when without cuts to the Rohan, they would know almost nothing about his past? I simply don't see any mistakes here. Not here, where one unforgettable scene is followed by another and the most intense moments are replaced by those that move me to tears. (23/12/2004)